With that being said, I'm not letting McLaren off the hook either. I don't believe that their current chassis is up there with the top guys. Ever since Paddy Lowe left them in 2012, their cars have been abhorrently average. Coincidentally, Mercedes have got so much stronger since Lowe joined them.

I think people are underestimating just how much of an impact Lowe had on McLaren and now Mercedes. I rate him up there with Newey as one of the absolute best Technical Directors in the sport.

Both McLaren and Honda are equal culprits. If you think about it, they have only lost people in engineering and aero. They are understaffed. They only really hired Peter Promodou as if he's some magician. Basically, their strategy was - hire him, Alonso and Honda would deliver the best engine in history and we'll win races by 2015-end and mount a challenge in 2016. I'd laugh if the situation wasn't so sad.

F1 has a lot of fake journalism ... ie, 'reporters' who basically serve up press releases.

We saw this in the US with the aborted USGP team. The 'reporters' on the old US SPEED network were falling all over themselves about how wonderful this was going to be. There were no problems at all at the team, everything was just peachy-keen and wonderful, right up to the day that they had to report the press releases that the team was folding and would never make its first race.

To me, its been equally hilarious watching the british-based reporters fall all over themselves with constant announcements of how wonderful the McClaren team is.

Anyone with half a brain could guess that last season was going to be a struggle. We'd just seen the year before that only one of three teams of engineers could get one of these new engines 'right'. We'd seen the struggles that Renault had had in trying to even get an engine to be 'workable'. So, all of the pre-season hype about how wonderful McClaren was going to be was obviously a lot of hot-air. And yet, it filled the airwaves from all of the gullible 'reporters' who predictably took McClaren's press releases and reported them as 'news'.

And of course, every single week since we've seen the regular stories about how McClaren-Honda is on the verge of massive improvement and the 'is-this-the-week?' stories that somehow expect this back-marker team is going to suddenly surge to the front.

Mainly its all an excercise in showing how worthless most of the 'reporting' and 'news' about F1 really is.

While everyone did know it wasn't likely to be a success, at least it had a chance. Whereas nobody else had any chance of beating Mercedes due to the advantage that they had locked in over Ferrari and Renault by the token regulations, and the fact that they would never allow someone else to beat them with their engine. For the good of the sport everyone including journalists wanted it to be true

So McLaren had a choice of going with Honda, and having a 5% chance of success and 95% chance of failure, or not go with Honda and have a 100% chance of mediocrity.

Williams are way ahead of McLaren right now, but one thing is for sure and that's that they will never win a championship. McLaren, as unlikely as it may be, just might pull it off if everything eventually comes together. And I respect that ambition, of not wanting to just make up the numbers.

F1 has a lot of fake journalism ... ie, 'reporters' who basically serve up press releases.

We saw this in the US with the aborted USGP team. The 'reporters' on the old US SPEED network were falling all over themselves about how wonderful this was going to be. There were no problems at all at the team, everything was just peachy-keen and wonderful, right up to the day that they had to report the press releases that the team was folding and would never make its first race.

To me, its been equally hilarious watching the british-based reporters fall all over themselves with constant announcements of how wonderful the McClaren team is.

Anyone with half a brain could guess that last season was going to be a struggle. We'd just seen the year before that only one of three teams of engineers could get one of these new engines 'right'. We'd seen the struggles that Renault had had in trying to even get an engine to be 'workable'. So, all of the pre-season hype about how wonderful McClaren was going to be was obviously a lot of hot-air. And yet, it filled the airwaves from all of the gullible 'reporters' who predictably took McClaren's press releases and reported them as 'news'.

And of course, every single week since we've seen the regular stories about how McClaren-Honda is on the verge of massive improvement and the 'is-this-the-week?' stories that somehow expect this back-marker team is going to suddenly surge to the front.

Mainly its all an excercise in showing how worthless most of the 'reporting' and 'news' about F1 really is.

While everyone did know it wasn't likely to be a success, at least it had a chance. Whereas nobody else had any chance of beating Mercedes due to the advantage that they had locked in over Ferrari and Renault by the token regulations, and the fact that they would never allow someone else to beat them with their engine. For the good of the sport everyone including journalists wanted it to be true

So McLaren had a choice of going with Honda, and having a 5% chance of success and 95% chance of failure, or not go with Honda and have a 100% chance of mediocrity.

Williams are way ahead of McLaren right now, but one thing is for sure and that's that they will never win a championship. McLaren, as unlikely as it may be, just might pull it off if everything eventually comes together. And I respect that ambition, of not wanting to just make up the numbers.

Your post makes it sound like that Honda's the missing link and the chassis is the cat's paws. McLaren is no Red Bull, and wouldn't be winning titles with even the best engine. McLaren as an organization is a disaster, don't just lay the blame at Honda's feet.

I will repeat what I have said multiple times. Do you see a lot happening at McLaren? No. When Mercedes was going through the building phase, they were hiring people left, right and center. You heard about team building. Even had illegal tire tests. Some even said they had too many cooks, but that also meant 1 less cook at their competitors. Red Bull, they have set up the single best aero dept. under Newey, and their operation runs like a well-oiled machine. Remember the DC days when RBR was building, you knew things were turning around. Even Ferrari, which didn't live up to its 2016 hype, at least tried Haas windtunnel, and basically turned the whole organization around in trying to get results.

What has McLaren done? Nothing. You get no feeling there's stuff happening around it. Look at successful team-building phases of the past and compare that to McLaren.

Their aim is to win 3 years from now. That's so ridiculous, I cannot comprehend how they were able to sell that BS to the whole sport. Always a few races away from entering Q3. I mean, they have distorted the field to the point, where people look forward to them entering Q3 like it's an achievement. This team is supposed to win titles. Yeah, that'll happen.

McLaren's fate is sealed by their culture as demonstrated when they shut out forming a deal with Red Bull.As if twice the budget and twice the testing for the engine would not have been a great idea, doubt about angling for sharing some tech on the chassis. But no, they were so confident that Red Bull we be ahead of them if they even shared engine tech.

Reality check guys. Red Bull are still ahead, just so are more other teams than if you were prepared to work together with people.

McLaren's fate is sealed by their culture as demonstrated when they shut out forming a deal with Red Bull.As if twice the budget and twice the testing for the engine would not have been a great idea, doubt about angling for sharing some tech on the chassis. But no, they were so confident that Red Bull we be ahead of them if they even shared engine tech.

Reality check guys. Red Bull are still ahead, just so are more other teams than if you were prepared to work together with people.

Exactly right. It's completely self defeating for them, especially as RBR have shown that they are more than happy to provide assistance to their engine supplier. McLaren are just pegging themselves back. As you said they were too scared of being beaten by RBR, because if we're honest they won't be able to compete chassis on chassis with them. But being behind one team to get ahead of four others seems like a good deal to me.

Given Russia's qualy results, probably the Honda engine might be a little bit ahead of the Renault in pure power today.

I think they have been for most of this year at least. Still a little unsure on their energy store but they seem to have solved that too. So essentially it seems it's their 'amazing' chassis holding them back.

Great result for McHonda today. Alonso's 6th place is fantastic and Button got a point too. Unexpected, they said they would struggle a lot here. Although obviously the Vettel DNF and both Red Bulls completely messing up helped them.

Blackhander wrote:

nixxxon wrote:

Given Russia's qualy results, probably the Honda engine might be a little bit ahead of the Renault in pure power today.

I think they have been for most of this year at least. Still a little unsure on their energy store but they seem to have solved that too. So essentially it seems it's their 'amazing' chassis holding them back.

Well, I dont think its fair to say they dont have a good chasis. Red Bull chasis is just incredibly good as always, since 2009.

Honda has clearly made big strides. They're no longer just moving obstacles.

The McLaren Honda is a mid-field car, it's just lacking power to overtake. When Alonso cleared the melee at the start, he was able to manage the gap to those behind him. Attrition helped Alonso finish better than what the car is capable of at the moment.

Given Russia's qualy results, probably the Honda engine might be a little bit ahead of the Renault in pure power today.

I think they have been for most of this year at least. Still a little unsure on their energy store but they seem to have solved that too. So essentially it seems it's their 'amazing' chassis holding them back.

Well, I dont think its fair to say they dont have a good chasis. Red Bull chasis is just incredibly good as always, since 2009.

You're right. It is probably on Williams level or there abouts. Not a bad chassis, but not on the level of the top teams either.

Honda has clearly made big strides. They're no longer just moving obstacles.

The McLaren Honda is a mid-field car, it's just lacking power to overtake. When Alonso cleared the melee at the start, he was able to manage the gap to those behind him. Attrition helped Alonso finish better than what the car is capable of at the moment.

Indeed, it was the perfect race for Alonso. No mistakes, no traffic, no drivers blocking him, Vettel out, both Red Bulls messing up completely... 6th place is more than what they deserve for their current pace

Given Russia's qualy results, probably the Honda engine might be a little bit ahead of the Renault in pure power today.

I think they have been for most of this year at least. Still a little unsure on their energy store but they seem to have solved that too. So essentially it seems it's their 'amazing' chassis holding them back.

Well, I dont think its fair to say they dont have a good chasis. Red Bull chasis is just incredibly good as always, since 2009.

You're right. It is probably on Williams level or there abouts. Not a bad chassis, but not on the level of the top teams either.

I think it's a clear step above the Williams tbh, it's up there with the TR battling for 4th best chassis imo. Hulkenberg is the latest driver to comment on how good the Macca takes the corners, he called it planted.

I do believe they are one of the teams who are not doing the tyre pressure trick that pirelli talked about and are suffering for it.

The Honda is still the thirstiest and least powerful engine and their ers is limited for safety reasons I read elsewhere and is the reason they need to reconfigure the layout next year. I don't know what effect that has but i'd guess they can't tap into it constantly like the other teams and it's affecting their efficiency.

_________________"Clark came through at the end of the first lap so far ahead that we in the pits were convinced that the rest of the field must have been wiped out in an accident."-Eddie Dennis, describing the dominance of Jim Clark in the Lotus 49 at Spa 1967

Lifted this from another site, it's from Enrico Benzing's blog and estimates the power of the manufacturers PU.

From AutosportForum"I believe this is PU output (ICE + the 160bhp from the ERS) in quali trim. I know a little of how these figures are derived (GPS speed + sensible estimates for weight, Cd etc + acoustic analysis gets gear ratios) and I'd expect them to be accurate to +/- 10bhp."

_________________"Clark came through at the end of the first lap so far ahead that we in the pits were convinced that the rest of the field must have been wiped out in an accident."-Eddie Dennis, describing the dominance of Jim Clark in the Lotus 49 at Spa 1967

Great result for McHonda today. Alonso's 6th place is fantastic and Button got a point too. Unexpected, they said they would struggle a lot here. Although obviously the Vettel DNF and both Red Bulls completely messing up helped them.

Yeah, what a great achievement. A 6th place finish when half the field in front got taken out in the first corner. Must be on the verge of wins by summer.

Great result for McHonda today. Alonso's 6th place is fantastic and Button got a point too. Unexpected, they said they would struggle a lot here. Although obviously the Vettel DNF and both Red Bulls completely messing up helped them.

Yeah, what a great achievement. A 6th place finish when half the field in front got taken out in the first corner. Must be on the verge of wins by summer.

In a track like that it is. Also in China, they ended both of them out of the points. Take that into comparsion

Great result for McHonda today. Alonso's 6th place is fantastic and Button got a point too. Unexpected, they said they would struggle a lot here. Although obviously the Vettel DNF and both Red Bulls completely messing up helped them.

Yeah, what a great achievement. A 6th place finish when half the field in front got taken out in the first corner. Must be on the verge of wins by summer.

In a track like that it is. Also in China, they ended both of them out of the points. Take that into comparsion

Also it's not so much that he gained 7th in the commotion at the start. More that he had the speed and consistency to hold it for the whole race.

It difficult to tell how much of a step forward it was because it's a fairly unusual track and I felt Alonso was really on it today, but it is more promising.

I think it's fair to say Red Bull will solidify 3rd place by the end of the year but I think McLaren can finish 4th and set themselves up for a much better 2017.

_________________"Clark came through at the end of the first lap so far ahead that we in the pits were convinced that the rest of the field must have been wiped out in an accident."-Eddie Dennis, describing the dominance of Jim Clark in the Lotus 49 at Spa 1967

Well done by Maclaren today. Yes they had some luck but having top class drivers to take advantage makes the difference. Somehow I get the feeling they lacking more in chasis than power. They did have better pace here which is more of a power track than China. Now if only Maclaren can admit that.

Well done by Maclaren today. Yes they had some luck but having top class drivers to take advantage makes the difference. Somehow I get the feeling they lacking more in chasis than power. They did have better pace here which is more of a power track than China. Now if only Maclaren can admit that.

Both Alonso and Boullier said they had to go into extreme fuel saving mode and couldn't unleash anywhere near the full potential of the car. He did one banzai lap on lap 52 just to see what he could do and ended up with the fifth fastest lap, just two tenths off Kimi's Ferrari, so the pace of the car doesn't look too terrible overall. It seems the Honda is very thirsty. But if they can manage that pace when they do unleash the beast then it suggests the chassis isn't holding them back much, if at all.

Well done by Maclaren today. Yes they had some luck but having top class drivers to take advantage makes the difference. Somehow I get the feeling they lacking more in chasis than power. They did have better pace here which is more of a power track than China. Now if only Maclaren can admit that.

Both Alonso and Boullier said they had to go into extreme fuel saving mode and couldn't unleash anywhere near the full potential of the car. He did one banzai lap on lap 52 just to see what he could do and ended up with the fifth fastest lap, just two tenths off Kimi's Ferrari, so the pace of the car doesn't look too terrible overall. It seems the Honda is very thirsty. But if they can manage that pace when they do unleash the beast then it suggests the chassis isn't holding them back much, if at all.

Well done by Maclaren today. Yes they had some luck but having top class drivers to take advantage makes the difference. Somehow I get the feeling they lacking more in chasis than power. They did have better pace here which is more of a power track than China. Now if only Maclaren can admit that.

Both Alonso and Boullier said they had to go into extreme fuel saving mode and couldn't unleash anywhere near the full potential of the car. He did one banzai lap on lap 52 just to see what he could do and ended up with the fifth fastest lap, just two tenths off Kimi's Ferrari, so the pace of the car doesn't look too terrible overall. It seems the Honda is very thirsty. But if they can manage that pace when they do unleash the beast then it suggests the chassis isn't holding them back much, if at all.

Amazing how many people think McLaren can't build a decent car.

HS ThompsonWhy don't you actually say something constructive, to support your argument. If you agree with Zoue great, i apreciate zoue comment, but you are just being demeaning. Decent is midfield. So they are decent. I am a Maclaren fan and simply pointing out that on a power track which is mostly point and squirt they did quite well (even in fuel saving). In China were I expected chasis to play a big role they went backwards. Yes Honda is bad, but I think they have an equally matched chasis. If Alonso unleashed for a few laps it was more about power than chasis. I agree Honda cannot sustain that power because it's thirsty, but doing faster laps when you come out of fuel saving at a track that is recognised as a power track is about power.

Well done by Maclaren today. Yes they had some luck but having top class drivers to take advantage makes the difference. Somehow I get the feeling they lacking more in chasis than power. They did have better pace here which is more of a power track than China. Now if only Maclaren can admit that.

Both Alonso and Boullier said they had to go into extreme fuel saving mode and couldn't unleash anywhere near the full potential of the car. He did one banzai lap on lap 52 just to see what he could do and ended up with the fifth fastest lap, just two tenths off Kimi's Ferrari, so the pace of the car doesn't look too terrible overall. It seems the Honda is very thirsty. But if they can manage that pace when they do unleash the beast then it suggests the chassis isn't holding them back much, if at all.

Amazing how many people think McLaren can't build a decent car.

HS ThompsonWhy don't you actually say something constructive, to support your argument. If you agree with Zoue great, i apreciate zoue comment, but you are just being demeaning. Decent is midfield. So they are decent. I am a Maclaren fan and simply pointing out that on a power track which is mostly point and squirt they did quite well (even in fuel saving). In China were I expected chasis to play a big role they went backwards. Yes Honda is bad, but I think they have an equally matched chasis. If Alonso unleashed for a few laps it was more about power than chasis. I agree Honda cannot sustain that power because it's thirsty, but doing faster laps when you come out of fuel saving at a track that is recognised as a power track is about power.

I think that's a bit simplistic. Lap times are a combination of power and chassis. If, say, they were running at 75% power, even on a chassis driven track, then that deficit still has to be compensated for somewhere. It's unrealistic to expect turning down the power to have no impact at all. So naturally when they turn it up they should see the lap times improve. As far as China goes, it has the longest straight in F1, along with another very long one after that, so power plays a big role there. If they have a power deficit then any gains they make on the twisty bits just disappear.

Well done by Maclaren today. Yes they had some luck but having top class drivers to take advantage makes the difference. Somehow I get the feeling they lacking more in chasis than power. They did have better pace here which is more of a power track than China. Now if only Maclaren can admit that.

Both Alonso and Boullier said they had to go into extreme fuel saving mode and couldn't unleash anywhere near the full potential of the car. He did one banzai lap on lap 52 just to see what he could do and ended up with the fifth fastest lap, just two tenths off Kimi's Ferrari, so the pace of the car doesn't look too terrible overall. It seems the Honda is very thirsty. But if they can manage that pace when they do unleash the beast then it suggests the chassis isn't holding them back much, if at all.

Amazing how many people think McLaren can't build a decent car.

HS ThompsonWhy don't you actually say something constructive, to support your argument. If you agree with Zoue great, i apreciate zoue comment, but you are just being demeaning. Decent is midfield. So they are decent. I am a Maclaren fan and simply pointing out that on a power track which is mostly point and squirt they did quite well (even in fuel saving). In China were I expected chasis to play a big role they went backwards. Yes Honda is bad, but I think they have an equally matched chasis. If Alonso unleashed for a few laps it was more about power than chasis. I agree Honda cannot sustain that power because it's thirsty, but doing faster laps when you come out of fuel saving at a track that is recognised as a power track is about power.

I think that's a bit simplistic. Lap times are a combination of power and chassis. If, say, they were running at 75% power, even on a chassis driven track, then that deficit still has to be compensated for somewhere. It's unrealistic to expect turning down the power to have no impact at all. So naturally when they turn it up they should see the lap times improve. As far as China goes, it has the longest straight in F1, along with another very long one after that, so power plays a big role there. If they have a power deficit then any gains they make on the twisty bits just disappear.

I'm just happy they are making progress. Most races do feature retirements, so Alonso at 6th is not unreasonable.

Last year Alonso started well and then lost all the places he gained. This year is better.

Honda, like many Japanese companies, works hard and silently. They're not Elon Musk like promoters--so lack of press-releases about who they hired for Power Unit should not be a sign of poor desire or lack of progress.

We are about to find out how good or bad the Mclaren chassis is with the coming races. Spain and Monaco punish the lackluster chassis. If Mclaren Honda can't be at least the 4th best car at those venues they can't blame the Honda engine. I can almost guarantee that Redbull will be ahead of at least one if not both Ferraris at Monaco and that Williams will not make Q3. I have high hopes for the Mclaren. Let us see.

I'm just happy they are making progress. Most races do feature retirements, so Alonso at 6th is not unreasonable.

Last year Alonso started well and then lost all the places he gained. This year is better.

Honda, like many Japanese companies, works hard and silently. They're not Elon Musk like promoters--so lack of press-releases about who they hired for Power Unit should not be a sign of poor desire or lack of progress.

Not unreasonable, considering that Kvyat took 1 Ferrari and 2 RBs away.

The 6th place, and being lapped by the winner. That's where McLaren is on its best, lucky day. Some way to go.

Well done by Maclaren today. Yes they had some luck but having top class drivers to take advantage makes the difference. Somehow I get the feeling they lacking more in chasis than power. They did have better pace here which is more of a power track than China. Now if only Maclaren can admit that.

Both Alonso and Boullier said they had to go into extreme fuel saving mode and couldn't unleash anywhere near the full potential of the car. He did one banzai lap on lap 52 just to see what he could do and ended up with the fifth fastest lap, just two tenths off Kimi's Ferrari, so the pace of the car doesn't look too terrible overall. It seems the Honda is very thirsty. But if they can manage that pace when they do unleash the beast then it suggests the chassis isn't holding them back much, if at all.

Amazing how many people think McLaren can't build a decent car.

HS ThompsonWhy don't you actually say something constructive, to support your argument. If you agree with Zoue great, i apreciate zoue comment, but you are just being demeaning. Decent is midfield. So they are decent. I am a Maclaren fan and simply pointing out that on a power track which is mostly point and squirt they did quite well (even in fuel saving). In China were I expected chasis to play a big role they went backwards. Yes Honda is bad, but I think they have an equally matched chasis. If Alonso unleashed for a few laps it was more about power than chasis. I agree Honda cannot sustain that power because it's thirsty, but doing faster laps when you come out of fuel saving at a track that is recognised as a power track is about power.

I think that's a bit simplistic. Lap times are a combination of power and chassis. If, say, they were running at 75% power, even on a chassis driven track, then that deficit still has to be compensated for somewhere. It's unrealistic to expect turning down the power to have no impact at all. So naturally when they turn it up they should see the lap times improve. As far as China goes, it has the longest straight in F1, along with another very long one after that, so power plays a big role there. If they have a power deficit then any gains they make on the twisty bits just disappear.

Not only that, but Sochi is one of the higher gas consumption tracks, alongside Montreal... If what we know about the engines is true, that marginal gains or deficits in electrical power recovery have the capacity to create a virtuous or a vicious circle, respectively, in power unit and car performance, then it would make sense that the PU deficit is felt on both power and chassis tracks. It's felt always. And by a bigger margin than previous free-engine-development formulas. It's just the name of the game...

We are about to find out how good or bad the Mclaren chassis is with the coming races. Spain and Monaco punish the lackluster chassis. If Mclaren Honda can't be at least the 4th best car at those venues they can't blame the Honda engine. I can almost guarantee that Redbull will be ahead of at least one if not both Ferraris at Monaco and that Williams will not make Q3. I have high hopes for the Mclaren. Let us see.

I'm not sure it is so easy, unfortunately... Both tracks will punish a bad power unit. Spain will reward the entire package, aero and power. Those many fast corners need power to navigate at speed, and if not enough power is available, expect a little of the available aero to be dropped from the car. In Monaco aero is not that important, in fact, but powering out from a lot of slow corners is.

I don't know. I'd like to see a lot more progress this year. It is painful to see McL suffering so much, as it is/was with Williams...And it would be interesting to see, if finally they come up in power, how bad or how good the chassis is.

So my question is, am I the ONLY one who can see what an utter disaster this "project" is ever since they started winter testing? Whenever I have voiced this opinion on forums and boards, I've either been told I don't know what I'm talking about, or it'll take time, or in one case an outright ban (some of you may figure out who I am from another forum).

I've been voicing the same thing, did so this time last year I did so right after testing and right after the first race.

At each step I said that things are not looking up. It's like when people said they were only 1 second or two seconds off the front runners - even though they were still qualifying more than 2 seconds and race pace was more than 3 seconds. Some people (sorry I am saying it) are deluded and don't actually understand how much of a gap it is.

You have people quick to blame "just the engine" or "just the car", when the truth is it's both elements. I still don't think that engine is as good as they "proclaim" but the car isn't capable of competing with Merc.

The second that first race hit last year you can tell McLaren were in a mess and last Year was never going to get better. At the first race they were not just slow or off the pace, they were disgusting and embarrassing for F1. When I said that I meant in such a way that even a back marker team could have beaten them.

Now this season, I predicted they would be where they are - effectively competing for a point or two at best and that's with DNFs. McLaren at the end of the season might be consistent with 9th/10th but that's it. No shocker that where they are is not good enough for the budget/experience and Staff they have.

They replaced Whitmarsh thinking it was his fault (wrong), Ron Dennis left and returned (wrong). Sometimes you need consistent Staff at the top and bottom.

So my question is, am I the ONLY one who can see what an utter disaster this "project" is ever since they started winter testing? Whenever I have voiced this opinion on forums and boards, I've either been told I don't know what I'm talking about, or it'll take time, or in one case an outright ban (some of you may figure out who I am from another forum).

I've been voicing the same thing, did so this time last year I did so right after testing and right after the first race.

At each step I said that things are not looking up. It's like when people said they were only 1 second or two seconds off the front runners - even though they were still qualifying more than 2 seconds and race pace was more than 3 seconds. Some people (sorry I am saying it) are deluded and don't actually understand how much of a gap it is.

You have people quick to blame "just the engine" or "just the car", when the truth is it's both elements. I still don't think that engine is as good as they "proclaim" but the car isn't capable of competing with Merc.

The second that first race hit last year you can tell McLaren were in a mess and last Year was never going to get better. At the first race they were not just slow or off the pace, they were disgusting and embarrassing for F1. When I said that I meant in such a way that even a back marker team could have beaten them.

Now this season, I predicted they would be where they are - effectively competing for a point or two at best and that's with DNFs. McLaren at the end of the season might be consistent with 9th/10th but that's it. No shocker that where they are is not good enough for the budget/experience and Staff they have.

They replaced Whitmarsh thinking it was his fault (wrong), Ron Dennis left and returned (wrong). Sometimes you need consistent Staff at the top and bottom.

When Red Bull started their Grand Prix program it took them five years to win a title. When Mercedes took over the successful Brawn team in 2010, it took them a further four years to get back to the top and that was without any major technical changes in the intervening years. McLaren have had to start completely afresh, with an engine partner who had been absent from F1 for years. And they've started this in probably the most difficult time in history to be able to be successful. They are not allowed any testing, even with brand new untried and unproven technology. They've been extremely limited with regard to the changes they have been able to make to the PU mid season, which nobody in previous eras has had to contend with. So they've had to do all their testing on track and if there are any issues bang goes another race weekend. It's a bit harsh to criticise them when the tools available to them to make a success of it are so heavily limited.

Those expecting McLaren to be fighting for podiums when the deck is so heavily stacked against them are being somewhat unrealistic IMO. Blame the retarded regulations for their predicament, not the team. All they can do is inch their way to better results over time.

We are about to find out how good or bad the Mclaren chassis is with the coming races. Spain and Monaco punish the lackluster chassis. If Mclaren Honda can't be at least the 4th best car at those venues they can't blame the Honda engine. I can almost guarantee that Redbull will be ahead of at least one if not both Ferraris at Monaco and that Williams will not make Q3. I have high hopes for the Mclaren. Let us see.

I'm not sure it is so easy, unfortunately... Both tracks will punish a bad power unit. Spain will reward the entire package, aero and power. Those many fast corners need power to navigate at speed, and if not enough power is available, expect a little of the available aero to be dropped from the car. In Monaco aero is not that important, in fact, but powering out from a lot of slow corners is.

I don't know. I'd like to see a lot more progress this year. It is painful to see McL suffering so much, as it is/was with Williams...And it would be interesting to see, if finally they come up in power, how bad or how good the chassis is.

Last year when Mclaren was mostly no better than any other team except Manor they scored points in Monaco and Hungary. Alonso actually finsihed 5th in Hungary. Spain was tough for them because of technical issues but from a performance stand point they didn't look too bad there relatively last year.Engine power doesn't matter in the high speed corners, it's not like they have a 300hp deficit. Their momentum and the aero should help them in the high speed stuff. And engine power does not really help in slow corners, driveability and suspension setup is more important there. If their chassis is good it should show in Spain, Monaco and Hungary.

McLaren is sixth best at a track where they were supposed to challenge Ferrari and show the amazing chassis, which, according to HS Thompson and Eric Boullier, should be fighting for podiums around the twisty streets of Monte Carlo.

McLaren is sixth best at a track where they were supposed to challenge Ferrari and show the amazing chassis, which, according to HS Thompson and Eric Boullier, should be fighting for podiums around the twisty streets of Monte Carlo.

And that's with two of the best drivers. Swap the Mclaren drivers and the Williams drivers and Williams would have also been ahead.

Last edited by mikeyg123 on Sat May 28, 2016 2:56 pm, edited 1 time in total.

McLaren is sixth best at a track where they were supposed to challenge Ferrari and show the amazing chassis, which, according to HS Thompson and Eric Boullier, should be fighting for podiums around the twisty streets of Monte Carlo.

And that's with the two best drivers. Swap the Mclaren drivers and the Williams drivers and Williams would have also been ahead.

I am actually waiting for McLaren acolytes to tell us that it's the drivers, the size zero chassis is just fine and ahead of Red Bull actually. Just wait for the spin.

The culture that said 'no' to Red Bull. That was just arrogant and foolish.

Why did they say 'no'? Because by saying 'no' they were going to beat Red Bull. or perhaps even win the championship?

So in saying 'no', the engine budget was cut through the lost revenue of the Red Bull contract, testing was reduce by having one team not two running the engine, and chance of collaborating in some way eliminated.

Not that individual decision, but the culture that said 'no' is the real reason they are going nowhere.

The culture that said 'no' to Red Bull. That was just arrogant and foolish.

Why did they say 'no'? Because by saying 'no' they were going to beat Red Bull. or perhaps even win the championship?

So in saying 'no', the engine budget was cut through the lost revenue of the Red Bull contract, testing was reduce by having one team not two running the engine, and chance of collaborating in some way eliminated.

Not that individual decision, but the culture that said 'no' is the real reason they are going nowhere.

McLaren is sixth best at a track where they were supposed to challenge Ferrari and show the amazing chassis, which, according to HS Thompson and Eric Boullier, should be fighting for podiums around the twisty streets of Monte Carlo.

As I said in the other threadMcLaren dont have qualifying mode for the engine, their qualy performances are not their true performance.